This pretty much sums it up

OP
OP
P

pyledriver80

Cheesehead
Joined
May 31, 2005
Messages
2,391
Reaction score
0
pyledriver80 said:
cheesey said:
pyledriver80 said:
all about da packers said:
Saints GM Mickey Loomis's combined record as a GM in 03/04/05 was 19 Wins - 29 Losses.

Not exactly an overnight success story.

What are you trying to point out?

It just goes to show that there is another way to go about it. You can be terrible one year, bring in rookies and FA's and be a powerhouse the next.

But lets be content spending 6 years building a team that may or may not pan out.
Pyle......arn't you the SAME person that keeps yelling "TT is only 12-20 in his 2 years here!"
Uh......so 19-29 is some how better????
I think Allabout is trying to point that out to you. But i guess it would just show you how silly your argument is, so you prefer to ignore that FACT.

Oh.....but you label ME a hypocrite. Nice.


I get a kick out of you trying to point things out. I can never understand it.

What was hypocritical?

TT is 12-20 and they were mediocre last year because TT sat on his hands as usual.

Loomis was 19-29 and realized that to make a push you have to be active so he signed a big time FA in Brees instead of sticking to some mythical "plan". They were playing in January.

Perhaps Ted should copy thier approach
Of COURSE you can't understand it! I use LOGIC to back up my points. You go on blind hatred!
Like i said.....your such a genius, I'm SURE that you could step into TT's job and make the Packers instant Super Bowl contenders. Heck, you seem to think you have ALL the answers!
Why arn't you already a GM for an NFL team? You seem to be wasting all your infinite knowledge on poor hypocritical idiots like me.


Rehashed, worn out material. Try to understand this

If you say my opinions are wrong, then are you not saying yours are right?

Doesn't that make you just like me?
 

Packnic

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 29, 2006
Messages
2,454
Reaction score
6
Location
Salisbury, NC
pyle... did we or did we not improve record wise from 2005s 4-12 to 2006s 8-8?

that is the only fact out there. forget opponents forget anything, under Ted Thompson we have fixed any semblance of a cap problem, improved 4 wins in one season. and are young at almost every position. Nothing but good things from a team in obvious decline in 2004. If and this is a big if , we decline from 8-8 this year... then you can raise some questions.

and trom... you aint kiddin... dont get cheesey angry... you wont like him when he gets angry.
 
OP
OP
P

pyledriver80

Cheesehead
Joined
May 31, 2005
Messages
2,391
Reaction score
0
pyle... did we or did we not improve record wise from 2005s 4-12 to 2006s 8-8?

that is the only fact out there. forget opponents forget anything, under Ted Thompson we have fixed any semblance of a cap problem, improved 4 wins in one season. and are young at almost every position. Nothing but good things from a team in obvious decline in 2004. If and this is a big if , we decline from 8-8 this year... then you can raise some questions.

and trom... you aint kiddin... dont get cheesey angry... you wont like him when he gets angry.


Nice. Now take that logic from 2004 to 2005. Did we not regress?
 

cheesey

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 25, 2005
Messages
1,000
Reaction score
3
Location
Wisconsin
cheesey said:
pyledriver80 said:
cheesey said:
pyledriver80 said:
all about da packers said:
Saints GM Mickey Loomis's combined record as a GM in 03/04/05 was 19 Wins - 29 Losses.

Not exactly an overnight success story.

What are you trying to point out?

It just goes to show that there is another way to go about it. You can be terrible one year, bring in rookies and FA's and be a powerhouse the next.

But lets be content spending 6 years building a team that may or may not pan out.
Pyle......arn't you the SAME person that keeps yelling "TT is only 12-20 in his 2 years here!"
Uh......so 19-29 is some how better????
I think Allabout is trying to point that out to you. But i guess it would just show you how silly your argument is, so you prefer to ignore that FACT.

Oh.....but you label ME a hypocrite. Nice.


I get a kick out of you trying to point things out. I can never understand it.

What was hypocritical?

TT is 12-20 and they were mediocre last year because TT sat on his hands as usual.

Loomis was 19-29 and realized that to make a push you have to be active so he signed a big time FA in Brees instead of sticking to some mythical "plan". They were playing in January.

Perhaps Ted should copy thier approach
Of COURSE you can't understand it! I use LOGIC to back up my points. You go on blind hatred!
Like i said.....your such a genius, I'm SURE that you could step into TT's job and make the Packers instant Super Bowl contenders. Heck, you seem to think you have ALL the answers!
Why arn't you already a GM for an NFL team? You seem to be wasting all your infinite knowledge on poor hypocritical idiots like me.


Rehashed, worn out material. Try to understand this

If you say my opinions are wrong, then are you not saying yours are right?

Doesn't that make you just like me?
Nope! Try to understand this........ You are wrong once again.
You go WAY overboard on your hatred. I say that TT has NOT been given a fair amount of time to prove that he's the man for the job, or a boob as you seem to think. If I was the same as you, but on the exact opposite end, I'd be calling Ted and asking him out on a date.
 
OP
OP
P

pyledriver80

Cheesehead
Joined
May 31, 2005
Messages
2,391
Reaction score
0
pyledriver80 said:
cheesey said:
pyledriver80 said:
cheesey said:
pyledriver80 said:
all about da packers said:
Saints GM Mickey Loomis's combined record as a GM in 03/04/05 was 19 Wins - 29 Losses.

Not exactly an overnight success story.

What are you trying to point out?

It just goes to show that there is another way to go about it. You can be terrible one year, bring in rookies and FA's and be a powerhouse the next.

But lets be content spending 6 years building a team that may or may not pan out.
Pyle......arn't you the SAME person that keeps yelling "TT is only 12-20 in his 2 years here!"
Uh......so 19-29 is some how better????
I think Allabout is trying to point that out to you. But i guess it would just show you how silly your argument is, so you prefer to ignore that FACT.

Oh.....but you label ME a hypocrite. Nice.


I get a kick out of you trying to point things out. I can never understand it.

What was hypocritical?

TT is 12-20 and they were mediocre last year because TT sat on his hands as usual.

Loomis was 19-29 and realized that to make a push you have to be active so he signed a big time FA in Brees instead of sticking to some mythical "plan". They were playing in January.

Perhaps Ted should copy thier approach
Of COURSE you can't understand it! I use LOGIC to back up my points. You go on blind hatred!
Like i said.....your such a genius, I'm SURE that you could step into TT's job and make the Packers instant Super Bowl contenders. Heck, you seem to think you have ALL the answers!
Why arn't you already a GM for an NFL team? You seem to be wasting all your infinite knowledge on poor hypocritical idiots like me.


Rehashed, worn out material. Try to understand this

If you say my opinions are wrong, then are you not saying yours are right?

Doesn't that make you just like me?
Nope! Try to understand this........ You are wrong once again.
You go WAY overboard on your hatred. I say that TT has NOT been given a fair amount of time to prove that he's the man for the job, or a boob as you seem to think. If I was the same as you, but on the exact opposite end, I'd be calling Ted and asking him out on a date.


Oh Ok, I'm sorry I am not happy with mediocre.

Welcome to America
 

cheesey

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 25, 2005
Messages
1,000
Reaction score
3
Location
Wisconsin
cheesey said:
pyledriver80 said:
cheesey said:
pyledriver80 said:
cheesey said:
pyledriver80 said:
all about da packers said:
Saints GM Mickey Loomis's combined record as a GM in 03/04/05 was 19 Wins - 29 Losses.

Not exactly an overnight success story.

What are you trying to point out?

It just goes to show that there is another way to go about it. You can be terrible one year, bring in rookies and FA's and be a powerhouse the next.

But lets be content spending 6 years building a team that may or may not pan out.
Pyle......arn't you the SAME person that keeps yelling "TT is only 12-20 in his 2 years here!"
Uh......so 19-29 is some how better????
I think Allabout is trying to point that out to you. But i guess it would just show you how silly your argument is, so you prefer to ignore that FACT.

Oh.....but you label ME a hypocrite. Nice.


I get a kick out of you trying to point things out. I can never understand it.

What was hypocritical?

TT is 12-20 and they were mediocre last year because TT sat on his hands as usual.

Loomis was 19-29 and realized that to make a push you have to be active so he signed a big time FA in Brees instead of sticking to some mythical "plan". They were playing in January.

Perhaps Ted should copy thier approach
Of COURSE you can't understand it! I use LOGIC to back up my points. You go on blind hatred!
Like i said.....your such a genius, I'm SURE that you could step into TT's job and make the Packers instant Super Bowl contenders. Heck, you seem to think you have ALL the answers!
Why arn't you already a GM for an NFL team? You seem to be wasting all your infinite knowledge on poor hypocritical idiots like me.


Rehashed, worn out material. Try to understand this

If you say my opinions are wrong, then are you not saying yours are right?

Doesn't that make you just like me?
Nope! Try to understand this........ You are wrong once again.
You go WAY overboard on your hatred. I say that TT has NOT been given a fair amount of time to prove that he's the man for the job, or a boob as you seem to think. If I was the same as you, but on the exact opposite end, I'd be calling Ted and asking him out on a date.


Oh Ok, I'm sorry I am not happy with mediocre.

Welcome to America
I'm not happy with mediocre either.........but i have my feet based in reality, where i realize that it takes time to build a winning team.
Seems to me that you are the type that wants to watch the show "60 Minutes", but wants it to be over in 10 minutes, and complains if it isn't.
They IMPROVED last year. I think they will again.
I can see you now......."Lord, give me patience..........and I want it RIGHT NOW!!!!!"
 

Lare

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 17, 2005
Messages
705
Reaction score
0
Location
Packwalking, WI
I'm not happy with mediocre either.........but i have my feet based in reality, where i realize that it takes time to build a winning team.

In reality, the time it takes to build a winning team only depends on one thing, the person in charge.

As I showed in a post earlier, it took Ron Wolf only 5-years to take a team that was the laughingstock of the NFL to winning the Super Bowl. And he started with much, much less than TT was given in his first year. And last year alone, New Orleans and the New York Jets made impressive improvements over the previous year.

The flip-side is that teams like the Lions and the Raiders did not. And why do you think that is? My guess is that Matt Millen and Al Davis had something to do with it, just as I think Mike Tannenbaum and Mickey Loomis had significant roles in the the improvement of their teams.

You want to give TT 10-years to try and improve the Packers, hey knock yourself out. You want to praise him for mediocrity, well whatever makes your boat float. Me, I think I'll continue to hold him to the standard of success the NFL uses (the win/loss record) and I'll compare him to the standards of the best in the league, not the Matt Millens and Al Davis's.
 

dhpackr

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 14, 2005
Messages
1,635
Reaction score
0
Location
SE Wisconsin
cheesey said:
I'm not happy with mediocre either.........but i have my feet based in reality, where i realize that it takes time to build a winning team.

In reality, the time it takes to build a winning team only depends on one thing, the person in charge.

As I showed in a post earlier, it took Ron Wolf only 5-years to take a team that was the laughingstock of the NFL to winning the Super Bowl. And he started with much, much less than TT was given in his first year. And last year alone, New Orleans and the New York Jets made impressive improvements over the previous year.

The flip-side is that teams like the Lions and the Raiders did not. And why do you think that is? My guess is that Matt Millen and Al Davis had something to do with it, just as I think Mike Tannenbaum and Mickey Loomis had significant roles in the the improvement of their teams.

You want to give TT 10-years to try and improve the Packers, hey knock yourself out. You want to praise him for mediocrity, well whatever makes your boat float. Me, I think I'll continue to hold him to the standard of success the NFL uses (the win/loss record) and I'll compare him to the standards of the best in the league, not the Matt Millens and Al Davis's.

:thumbsup: :twocents: If you're going to build a team around 4th 5th 6th round draft picks, and be afraid to sign key free agents, expect to be 8-8 forever.
What would the Packers record in '06 be if A-Rod was our starting QB?
 

Lare

Cheesehead
Joined
Jan 17, 2005
Messages
705
Reaction score
0
Location
Packwalking, WI
Yes, Woodson and Pickett were probably the two most successful of the over 120 free agent and waiver wire signings TT has made since he's been here. Just out of curiosity, how much did they improve the defensive rankings of the Packers last year compared to the previous year?
 

Arles

Cheesehead
Joined
Mar 9, 2007
Messages
304
Reaction score
0
Nice. Now take that logic from 2004 to 2005. Did we not regress?
That was TT's first seaso. Oh, and never underestimate the Sherminator's ability to mess something up.

Yes, Woodson and Pickett were probably the two most successful of the over 120 free agent and waiver wire signings TT has made since he's been here.
How many of those 100+ that didn't work out still have dead money on the cap? Most of these guys were undrafted FAs or inexpensive depth guys. TT has taken the stance that building through the draft (with only 1-2 key additions in FA each season) is the way to go. Seems like this plan has work from 05 to 06 and we'll see how it does this season.

Just out of curiosity, how much did they improve the defensive rankings of the Packers last year compared to the previous year?
I thought our defense was great and we didn't need to "waste" a first round pick on a DT?

As I showed in a post earlier, it took Ron Wolf only 5-years to take a team that was the laughingstock of the NFL to winning the Super Bowl.
Yet, in spite of obvious improvement from 05 to 06, TT only deserves two seasons.
 

dhpackr

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 14, 2005
Messages
1,635
Reaction score
0
Location
SE Wisconsin
Yes, Woodson and Pickett were probably the two most successful of the over 120 free agent and waiver wire signings TT has made since he's been here. Just out of curiosity, how much did they improve the defensive rankings of the Packers last year compared to the previous year?

That's my point. From now on whenever I talk about TT, you have to include that he brang Pickett, and Woodson to the packers. Because that is the first thing people will always throw at you.

woodson had a pro-bowl year, but I can't say Pickett was a Force inside

How many players has TT gotten for his Hall of fame QB?
I know Green, Walker, Rivera, Whale, have all left on TT watch. But who has he gotten for #4 to replace Walker, Green?
How are the packers better after losing Green?
Jennings started out OK, but then just disappeared the second half of the season.
I wish we had a GM that got players for Brett the same way the GM for the Colts gets offensive players for Manning
 

dhpackr

Cheesehead
Joined
Sep 14, 2005
Messages
1,635
Reaction score
0
Location
SE Wisconsin
dhpackr said:
Jennings started out OK, but then just disappeared the second half of the season.

Somebody wanna field this for mr. short memory?

if you're gonna say he was hurt, OK but there were times the guy looked completly lost during games in December
 

Zero2Cool

I own a website
Joined
Dec 12, 2004
Messages
11,903
Reaction score
4
Location
Green Bay, WI
Do you guys even think before you post this ignorant, moronic and insensible ********? Afraid to sign people? Then the argument is its not his money?




It's the off season, not end of the world. Get a grip.
 

longtimefan

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
25,356
Reaction score
4,086
Location
Milwaukee
I wish we had a GM that got players for Brett the same way the GM for the Colts gets offensive players for Manning

6 rb on roster none more then 2 years experience
1 guy was listed as playing with another team but had no carries for them...
Dont forget who did they let go b4 the 2006 season?????????

WR 4 rookies, 4 with 1 year experience, 5, years, 2 years, Marvin Harrison, Reggie Wayne..
No free agents in this group

TE, 5 years experience, 3 years, 2 rookie, 8 years experience, 4 years
No f/a in this group either

O/g and o/t only one was a f/a and he was with the colts for a bit, went to the lions for 2 years and looks like he is a colt again..



So where are the "weapons" the colts gm gets for Manning?
 

cheesey

Cheesehead
Joined
Nov 25, 2005
Messages
1,000
Reaction score
3
Location
Wisconsin
cheesey said:
I'm not happy with mediocre either.........but i have my feet based in reality, where i realize that it takes time to build a winning team.

In reality, the time it takes to build a winning team only depends on one thing, the person in charge.

As I showed in a post earlier, it took Ron Wolf only 5-years to take a team that was the laughingstock of the NFL to winning the Super Bowl.

You want to give TT 10-years to try and improve the Packers, hey knock yourself out. You want to praise him for mediocrity, well whatever makes your boat float. Me, I think I'll continue to hold him to the standard of success the NFL uses (the win/loss record) and I'll compare him to the standards of the best in the league, not the Matt Millens and Al Davis's.
Uh..........did I say to give him 10 years? This is his THIRD DRAFT. How can you say he's no good after only TWO seasons?
ALL i said was to be FAIR. Give him at least SOME time to try to fix the mess. If by the 5 year mark the Packers suck, then by all means, call for his head.
You think someone else could have magically did more with what TT had to start with?
I'm JUST saying he hasn't even had a realistic chance yet.
 

Members online

Latest posts

Top